Piers Morgan and New York Mayor Michael Bloombergs want to be dictators and slave masters. Regulating a person’s diet is the regulation of a person’s life. Here was Morgans response to a guest who disagreed with him on sugary drink control:

I think people need [these types of laws] occasionally, particularly on issues like smoking, drinking, guzzling sodas too big for them, you know, eating 16 Big Macs a day, whatever it may be, the reality is we all need a bit of nannying about that. Thats why so many people are on diets. Thats a form of nanny state.When governments pass laws that force people to eat a certain way in the name of this is good for you and society, they are not being nannies. They are being dictators and slave masters.

Once you go down the road of forced good intentions, there are no stop signs along the way. Today its sugary drinks; tomorrow dictators will want to tell us where to live, the jobs we should have, the friends we should associate with, how to spend our money, and what we can say.

In fact, weve already gone down this road. Watch what you say or youll be cited for hate speech. The money we earn is not really ours. When government dictators determine by law to exempt some of our income from taxation, thats a sure indicator that the government believes it can claim all our income. We could take it all, but weve decided to exempt some from taxation.

The Democrats have just proposed $1 trillion in new tax confiscation because they believe it’s their money to spend. We’re not capable of spending it in the right way.

Democrat Nancy Pelosi said: Tax cuts are spending. . . . They are called tax expenditures. Spending money on tax breaks. And thats the spending that we must curtail as well.

Taxation is never sold as being bad for anyone. Its always for the greater good. The same is true for laws governing speech that is said to make people uncomfortable or is defined as hateful.

How many times have we heard liberals pontificate over how they are pro-choice? One of the favorite pro-abortion slogans is, Our bodies, our lives, our right to decide!

Being pro-choice is only legitimate if a woman wants to kill her pre-born baby. But dont ever propose this slogan: Our bodies, our lives, our right to decide what to eat and drink!

Its one thing if well-concerned people put campaigns together to help people make good dietary choices. Im all for it, as long as (1) they pay for it, and (2) the government doesnt force anybody to comply.

There was a time when blacks were said not to be capable of freedom. They needed the security of slavery because they couldnt make the right choices on their own. Slavery was said to be necessary for them. Here are two examples of how slavery was often justified:

Slavery was good for the slaves; the slave owners took on the burden of caring for the interests of inferior beings, seeing that they would be fed, clothed and given religious instruction.

The slaves are not capable of taking care of themselves. This idea was popular in the United States in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries among people, such as George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who regarded slavery as morally reprehensible yet continued to hold slaves and to obtain personal services from them and income from the products these servants (as they preferred to call them) were compelled to produce. It would be cruel to set free people who would then, at best, fall into destitution and suffering.

Piers Morgan and Mayor Michael Bloomberg would fit right in with the slavery arguments of the past. We need masters to force us to behave a certain way because some people arent capable of making good decisions as we see them. Slavery is alive and well in America, and it does by the name liberalism.

>>I think people need [these types of laws] occasionally, particularly on issues like smoking, drinking, guzzling sodas too big for them, you know, eating 16 Big Macs a day, whatever it may be, the reality is we all need a bit of nannying about that. Thats why so many people are on diets. Thats a form of nanny state.<<

Once again, John, there is NO WAY your satire can compete with reality.

Seriously, TSR, I thought this was another of John’s excellent satires (not that you tried on this one, I am making a point — point to follow on next sentence).

With liberals, it is IMPOSSIBLE to satirize beyond their reality!

This is the second time I have pinged JS on what could only be satire except it really happened!

I hope you don’t mind my pinging you John on these “damn, this ISN’T Satire?” threads...

8
posted on 03/13/2013 11:02:51 AM PDT
by freedumb2003
(Establishment Republicans don't like that totalitarian thing unless it is THEIR totalitarian thing!)

No human being ‘needs or deserves’ dictators or slave masters. See: the US Constitution.

However, if Pi$$ Morgan was trying to make a point that this despicable group of ‘nanny-staters’ will force citizens to be more protective of our rights - then let us pray we use this as a lesson in liberty.

Piers is a pompous footstool for The State. He makes being averagely stupid commendable, as he is degrees above those who are only stupid. He works at stupid the way Dale Carnegie worked at enunciation, brevity and clarity in addressing others. CPAC should start giving out Piers Awards to those MSM career toadies whose cheap, false and silly political stances are the most profoundly stupid. It could be a platinum statue of a prancing poodle on hind legs with forelegs lifted entreating a favored snack. The “Piers”.

Why would Piers emigrate to the ‘Land of the Free, Home of the Brave’ to ‘escape’ a Monarchy and then continually run down the “Adopted Country’ and appear to want it to turn into - at the very least - a Monarchy?

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

As dictator, I would control elections to ensure that they were completely honest. I would use all my powers to force everyone to abide by the results of honest elections — even if the election resulted in me losing all power.

Under my dictatorship, everyone would be required to eat and drink only what they wanted to eat and drink. They would be required to allow their neighbours to overindulge, unless they could convince them to do otherwise by reason or example.

And how is The New Slavery justified, Piers? I work to support my family. If I’m working to support someone else’s family as well the least they an do is get their asses over to my house on Saturday morning to mow the lawn and wash the car. And a “thank you” would be nice. But I ain’t waiting.

We need masters to force us to behave a certain way because some people arent capable of making good decisions as we see them. Slavery is alive and well in America, and it does by the name liberalism.

The libtards who favor paternalism lose sight of the fact that the fundamental basis of achieving the individual's good is his guidance by his own judgment. They show absolutely no respect for the character of the consumers as rational beings, who must be persuaded by facts and logic, and not be compelled as though they were brutes, in the name of something allegedly more valuable than their free judgment and their dignity as rational beings.

Each human being, as the possessor of reason, is valuable and competent and should be free to run his own life and pursue his own happiness. The use of any specific case as the pretext for overturning this principle opens the floodgates to unlimited destruction though the use of physical force to overrule peoples judgment, and thus, to prevent them from achieving their well-being or to compel them to act against their own well-being.

I have heard LIEbertarians support dietary laws because they don’t want to pay the health care bills of fatso next door. That is the “logic” that will take us further down the Soviet/Nazi path. They don’t want old people to live either because they don’t want to pay for Medicare.

This is the logic libertarians use to feed limo liberalism’s Soviet dreams. King Bloomers used to claim he is an independent libertarian. His excuse for banning soda cups is the “cost of healthcare.”

And occasionally dictators and their useful idiots need to be hanged from lampposts.

There has been no event more distressing to the elitists in the 21st century than the Libyan civil war in 2011. As much as some here deny the Libyans their victory, the UN/Soros/Obuma/NWO elitists freaked out after their buddies were hanged from lampposts on the streets of Tripoli.

The Libyans dragged out the general of the army into the town square and blew his brains out. They attacked Kaddhafi’s elite southern mercenaries and killed them in the streets, hanged them from lampposts and burned down their towns.

This freaked out the UN elitists. Hillary wanted the Libyan militias and army deserters to stand trial for killing her buddies.

The Libyan civil war made it known to the Soros/UN/Nazi elitists that they might not survive a revolution. They are terrified by the Libyan example.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.